Issue 30.4

We are pleased to announce the publication of the fourth issue in EIA’s 30th anniversary volume. This issue includes an essay by Kristy A. Belton on the UNHCR’s global #IBelong Campaign to eradicate statelessness, the first of a two-part series; a feature by Tim Meijers and Marlies Glasius on the expressivist potential of international criminal courts; a book symposium on Allen Buchanan‘s The Heart of Human Rights, featuring articles by Pietro Maffettone, David Miller, Andrea Sangiovanni, Jesse Tomalty, Lorenzo Zucca, and a response from Allen Buchanan; a review essay by Jennifer C. Rubenstein on the lessons of effective altruism; and book reviews.

The subject of belonging conjures up a realm of emotions. This essay explores statelessness through the prism of belonging, asking whether the United Nations Refugee Agency’s reframing of statelessness as an issue of belonging can be successful in eradicating statelessness globally.

After more than a decade of work, the accomplishments of the International Criminal Court are highly contested. In this article, the authors ask, what can and should we expect from international criminal courts? How can international trial and punishment constitute a suitable response to episodes of mass violence?

The last few decades have seen a lively philosophical debate surrounding human rights. Allen Buchanan’s book The Heart of Human Rights constitutes an important and novel contribution to this debate, focusing on the moral dimensions of international legal human rights (ILHRs) and the institutions responsible for their existence and implementation.

In this essay, Miller throws doubt on Allen Buchanan’s claim that to understand the system of international legal human rights, we must acknowledge not only their “well-being function” but also a second function that he calls their “status egalitarian function.”

In this essay, Tomalty argues that Buchanan’s alternative account of the justification of ILHRs is problematic. Rejecting the “Mirroring View” does not entail the irrelevance of moral human rights to the justification of the content of ILHRs.

Buchanan responds to some of the points made by each of the contributors to the symposium, making his case for taking international laws and institutions seriously and urging scholars to continue this discussion.

This essay focuses on the tension between robust international law (RIL) and democratic constitutions. The author argues that Buchanan is broadly correct about the nature of the relationship between RIL and constitutional democracy, but that the tension between them runs deeper than his discussion allows us to see.